570
PARTISAN REVIEW
China. On the other side were more "humanistic" or "cultural" scholars who
increasingly worried about the absence of a real vision of being Chinese in
this era of reform. The government, of course, was much more interested in
the first group, many of whose members rapidly rose in the academic
hierarchy. This left. the second group not only more concerned than ever for
China's soul and future direction, but more and more unhappy with its own
position.
The second tension was with the government itself.
As
intellectuals
gained in stature and numbers, they began to push for further liberalizations
or even to attack the government. Scientists as well as humanists were in the
forefront: one of the most visible figures was the astrophysicist and univer–
sity administrator Fang Lizhi. But writers, literary scholars, and others who
engaged in a massive rethinking of China's history and culture all played a
central role. Some, like the prominent journalist Liu Binyan, tried hard to stay
within the bounds of party loyalty; others did not.
Fang Lizhi and other dissidents spoke directly of democracy and civil
liberties. Many cultural thinkers addressed the sense of national humiliation,
lack of direction and "malaise" they identified in China. Both sorts ofwritings
and teachings helped to pave the way for the student protest movement. In
the minds of many students, they blurred together. Democracy was not just
a preferable form of government but the symbolic answer to China's
wounded cultural pride and economic backwardness.
By 1989, students focused on these tensions. Still, a genuine liberaliza–
tion had taken place. The repression of the 1986-87 dissent had been mild.
Publishing was far more open than it had been during the first three decades
of the People's Republic. Above
all ,
the increasingly vital intellectual life led
Chinese students and intellectuals to cast themselves as the conscience of the
country.
The student protest movement ofApril to June began with a focus on
intellectuals' concerns. In a sense, it was part of a process of intellectual class
formation begun at the turn of the century, pushed forward especially in
1919, and interrupted by the communist revolution. But the student move–
ment eventually made connections to a wider range of people, through its
condemnation of corruption. And people who primarily were concerned with
economics responded to the students' initiative in confronting the government.
At its core, however, this remained a student movement, interested primarily
in such civil liberties as freedom of speech, publication and assembly. These
were pursued not just out of selfishness, but out of a sense that China needed
the advice which intellectuals had to offer.
The immediate occasion for the movement was the death of Hu
Yaobang on April 15th. Hu had been head of the Communist Party during
